Changes to council's public question time 'an attack on democracy'

COUNCIL leaders have been accused of ‘launching an attack on democracy’ after a decision to reduce the time given to the public and councillors to ask questions at meetings.

Public question time at Wycombe District Council gives residents and councillors a chance to submit enquiries on recent decisions, council policy or make requests for information.

Members last week agreed to cut the time limit from three to one minute for each question to be asked, claiming more questions will get dealt with within the allotted question time hour.

Some also hailed it as a step forward to stop quetioners 'waffling' or using the time to make political statements.

But Cllr Matt Knight, who represents Micklefield, believes the decision will damage the quality of the questioning and stands in the way of democracy.

He said: "The Tories, and the leader of the Labour group, launched an attack on local democracy in supporting proposals to reduce the time given to members of the public to only one minute each at full council meetings.

"I got involved in local politics by attending the meetings, sitting in the public gallery and asking questions. As a nervous member of the public it is not always easy to be that concise and to limit members of the public puts a further barrier in the way of people who want to engage in local democracy.

Promoted stories

"It is sometimes necessary to use some extended time in asking a question to give context, and communicate the views of the public we represent.

"There are only a few council meetings a year and in the interest of democracy, transparency and proper scrutiny we should make full use of that time to ensure all views are heard and sufficient time is given to this."

A decision by WDC’s Regulatory and Appeals committee reduced the time for public and councillors’ initial and supplementary questions to the Cabinet from three minutes to one.

And while the initial answer time will remain at three minutes, the limit for answers to supplementary questions has been cut to two minutes rather than three.

Those opposing the change failed to vote through two amendments, arguing to extend supplementary questions to three minutes and to allow extra time for members should those from the public finish early.

However, supporters stressed the changes would allow for more questions per session, with Conservatives pointing out only seven of 12 of members’ enquiries were dealt with at the last meeting.

During last week's discussion, Tory Cllr Tony Green said: "We have seen multiple examples of why we need to make changes. The public and the council do ask questions and I would not want to stop that.

"But it does not take more than a minute to ask a question. We get people who come along to make political statements and that is not the purpose.

Share article

"The same goes for members, if they can’t ask a question within a minute then perhaps they need to think about what they are doing at the meeting.

"Question time is not the place for that, and we don’t need a lot of waffling which is what we are getting at the moment."

Promoted Stories

Comments (7)

Hasn't the BFP gotten the memo about their name change? We Don't Care Is their new name, and given their wasteful behaviour, disdain for the taxpayer, and inability to take onboard any feedback, they thought this name would better illustrate their mission.

Hasn't the BFP gotten the memo about their name change?
We
Don't
Care
Is their new name, and given their wasteful behaviour, disdain for the taxpayer, and inability to take onboard any feedback, they thought this name would better illustrate their mission.s6blr

Hasn't the BFP gotten the memo about their name change? We Don't Care Is their new name, and given their wasteful behaviour, disdain for the taxpayer, and inability to take onboard any feedback, they thought this name would better illustrate their mission.

Score: 14

Cllr Trevor Snaith says...9:50am Tue 5 Aug 14

This is all about stifling democracy... The fact is that the Lib Dems (Cllr Farmer and Snaith) proposed to allow extra time for members should those from the public finish early. The Conservative group opposed the amendment!!!

This is all about stifling democracy...
The fact is that the Lib Dems (Cllr Farmer and Snaith) proposed to allow extra time for members should those from the public finish early.
The Conservative group opposed the amendment!!!Cllr Trevor Snaith

This is all about stifling democracy... The fact is that the Lib Dems (Cllr Farmer and Snaith) proposed to allow extra time for members should those from the public finish early. The Conservative group opposed the amendment!!!

Score: 5

mistamina says...10:07am Tue 5 Aug 14

Well done, Knight & Snaith. this is not the first time the Nasty Party has tried to stop input. it will not be the last.

Well done, Knight & Snaith. this is not the first time the Nasty Party has tried to stop input. it will not be the last.mistamina

Well done, Knight & Snaith. this is not the first time the Nasty Party has tried to stop input. it will not be the last.

Score: 14

RowanIW says...3:01pm Tue 5 Aug 14

Did anybody propose extending the total time available from one hour to say one and a half hours? That would seem more rational (and democratic) than limiting the time for each questioner. And what about training councillors and officers to speak as concisely and clearly as possible so that meetings are conducted as effectively as possible so that more time might then be available for public questions?!

Did anybody propose extending the total time available from one hour to say one and a half hours? That would seem more rational (and democratic) than limiting the time for each questioner.
And what about training councillors and officers to speak as concisely and clearly as possible so that meetings are conducted as effectively as possible so that more time might then be available for public questions?!RowanIW

Did anybody propose extending the total time available from one hour to say one and a half hours? That would seem more rational (and democratic) than limiting the time for each questioner. And what about training councillors and officers to speak as concisely and clearly as possible so that meetings are conducted as effectively as possible so that more time might then be available for public questions?!

Score: 7

Mr Silent Majority says...4:52pm Tue 5 Aug 14

'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.

'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.Mr Silent Majority

'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.

Score: 1

mistamina says...5:28pm Tue 5 Aug 14

Mr Silent Majority wrote…

'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.

Spell it our man! Not all of us live in your brain. You seem to have a view, Silent Maj make it clearer please. Also, tell us whether you think there should be a greater public accountability, you create a political earthquake from the ground up. Or just a few blue friends and their officer pals making mistakes all on their own-some.

[quote][p][bold]Mr Silent Majority[/bold] wrote:
'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.[/p][/quote]Spell it our man! Not all of us live in your brain. You seem to have a view, Silent Maj make it clearer please.
Also, tell us whether you think there should be a greater public accountability, you create a political earthquake from the ground up. Or just a few blue friends and their officer pals making mistakes all on their own-some.mistamina

Mr Silent Majority wrote…

'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.

Spell it our man! Not all of us live in your brain. You seem to have a view, Silent Maj make it clearer please. Also, tell us whether you think there should be a greater public accountability, you create a political earthquake from the ground up. Or just a few blue friends and their officer pals making mistakes all on their own-some.

Score: 3

faircuppa says...10:34pm Wed 6 Aug 14

Mr Silent Majority wrote…

'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.

Yeh, libs out for a generation locally and nationally, opposed Iraq then bombed Libya etc. Tuition fees will also haunt them.

[quote][p][bold]Mr Silent Majority[/bold] wrote:
'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.[/p][/quote]Yeh, libs out for a generation locally and nationally, opposed Iraq then bombed Libya etc. Tuition fees will also haunt them.faircuppa

Mr Silent Majority wrote…

'Stifling democracy' - priceless BS from the Lib Dem councillor. It won't have any effect what-so-ever... what will though is the fact that at next years GE we'll have about 72,000 voters in Wycombe deciding which candidate we want to represent us in Westminster, whilst thanks to his 'democratic stifling' party, dozens and dozens of other constituencies will also select an MP, but with over 10,000 fewer voters in each.

Yeh, libs out for a generation locally and nationally, opposed Iraq then bombed Libya etc. Tuition fees will also haunt them.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standardards Organisations's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a compaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here